????人人對(duì)商界東山再起的神話總是津津樂(lè)道。毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)，成為某企業(yè)的“救世主”同樣也會(huì)給個(gè)人事業(yè)的發(fā)展大大加分，這也是眾多高管愿意加盟“問(wèn)題公司”，并期望大展身手的原因。

????但是，接受這種挑戰(zhàn)的CEO們所要承受的時(shí)間壓力也許是他們之前從未經(jīng)歷過(guò)的。尤其是當(dāng)今社會(huì)“及時(shí)滿(mǎn)足”盛行，一旦涉及投資回報(bào)，他們必須在短時(shí)間內(nèi)就能有所建樹(shù)；要知道，在獲取信息異常方便的今天，監(jiān)督企業(yè)的發(fā)展進(jìn)度并非難事。

????最近，一些CEO們終于耗盡了股東的耐心，被“掃地出門(mén)”。例如，雅虎（Yahoo）前任CEO 卡羅爾?巴茨在本月早些時(shí)候不幸被解雇。在股東們的眼里，任職兩年的巴茨并沒(méi)有讓處境艱難的雅虎重振昔日雄風(fēng)。

????同樣，美國(guó)在線（AOL）的股東們正對(duì)蒂姆?阿姆斯特朗的復(fù)興戰(zhàn)略憂心忡忡。據(jù)悉，AOL最近幾個(gè)季度的收入情況很不理想，許多業(yè)內(nèi)人士都迫切希望看到AOL取得積極的進(jìn)展。

????但是，一家企業(yè)的復(fù)蘇到底需要多長(zhǎng)時(shí)間？高管獵頭公司W(wǎng)yatt & Jaffe總裁馬克?謝斐給出的答案是8個(gè)季度。他說(shuō)：“我記得以前的期限是16個(gè)季度，不過(guò)那是互聯(lián)網(wǎng)泡沫出現(xiàn)之前。二十世紀(jì)90年代，我們會(huì)給人們更長(zhǎng)的時(shí)間，因?yàn)?，我們認(rèn)為，要做成一件事就得花費(fèi)更長(zhǎng)的時(shí)間。”

????美國(guó)西北大學(xué)凱洛格管理學(xué)院（Northwestern's Kellogg school of management）的管理學(xué)教授詹姆斯?施恩稱(chēng)，8個(gè)季度算是很慷慨了。新上任的CEO最多在四個(gè)季度之內(nèi)就要做出顯著的成績(jī)。他不但要實(shí)現(xiàn)盈利，還要制定目標(biāo)明確的計(jì)劃，而這個(gè)計(jì)劃要同時(shí)讓專(zhuān)家、公司董事會(huì)和股東信服。

????當(dāng)然，扭轉(zhuǎn)公司不利局面所需的時(shí)間與公司手頭上可支配的資金直接相關(guān)。瀕臨破產(chǎn)的公司大多沒(méi)有時(shí)間來(lái)追求重塑品牌這樣高遠(yuǎn)的戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)。但對(duì)于AOL這樣的流動(dòng)資金相對(duì)充裕、經(jīng)營(yíng)模式卻過(guò)于陳腐的公司，回旋的余地稍微充分一點(diǎn)。

明確的衡量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是關(guān)鍵

????Everybody loves a corporate comeback. They sure look good on a resume, too, which means that the prospect of a turnaround often lures executives to take charge of troubled companies.

????But CEOs who do accept the challenge are on the clock in a way that they may not have been before. In a society accustomed to instant gratification, especially when it comes to a return on the money we invest, the timeline for turnarounds are shorter; everyone has access to more information, and they can monitor a company's progress.

????Recently, some CEOs have borne the brunt of shareholder impatience. Yahoo's (YHOO) board ousted Carol Bartz from the CEO chair earlier this month after what they saw was an unsuccessful two-year attempt to revive the struggling tech company to its former Internet glory.

????Likewise, shareholders are getting restless about Tim Armstrong's turnaround strategy for flagging digital brand AOL (AOL). The company's most recent quarterly earnings report was dismal, and many in the industry are anxious to see positive results.

????But how much time should a turnaround take? Eight quarters, says Mark Jaffe, president of executive search firm Wyatt & Jaffe. "I remember when it used to be 16," he says, "but that was before the Internet bubble. Back in the 90s, we used to give people more time. We simply thought it took longer to do things."

????Eight quarters is actually generous, says James Shein, a management professor at Northwestern's Kellogg school of management. A new CEO needs to show significant progress in four quarters at the most, he adds. Not that the company needs to be profitable, but there has to be a plan with clear goals that convinces experts as well as a company's board and shareholders.

????Of course, the amount of time a CEO should realistically have to turn a company around is directly related to the cash a company has on hand. Companies headed for bankruptcy simply don't have time to bounce around a lofty re-branding strategy. Companies with a relatively reliable stream of cash but a stale business model, such as AOL, have a little bit more leeway.

Clarity is key